Типичные ошибки при производстве судебной экспертизы по спорам, связанным с воспитанием детей

The article analyses errors when appointing and conducting a forensic examination of disputes related to children’s upbringing. When summarizing expert practice in this category of civil cases (based on the study of 97 expert opinions on forensic psychological examination), the most significant errors were identified: incorrect determination of the type of expertise (including the appointment of psychological and pedagogical expertise which does not have a methodological basis as forensic examination), non-compliance with the qualification requirements to a forensic expert and, as a result, the introduction of an improper subject of forensic expert activity into the judicial process, an expert’s going beyond the limits of specialized knowledge and procedural powers, the incompleteness of research, the use of invalid research methods and techniques, and other methodological violations, associated with the incorrect assessment of the results of psychological diagnostics, inaccurate phenomenological analysis of essential phenomena of child-parent relations.Considering that due to the facts to be proved are essential for deciding on a case, the expert’s opinion is of particular importance and can significantly affect the formation of the court’s inner conviction, which means that expert errors significantly increase the risk of judicial errors. The article substantiates the urgent necessity of the early enactment of a legal act regulating experts’ responsibility for the level of their qualifications and setting professional requirements to experts.Статья посвящена анализу ошибок, возникающих при назначении и производстве судебной экспертизы по спорам, связанным с воспитанием детей. При обобщении экспертной практики по данной категории гражданских дел (на основании изучения 97 заключений эксперта по судебно-психологической экспертизе) выявлены наиболее существенные ошибки: неверное определение вида экспертизы (в том числе назначение не имеющей методологических основ в качестве судебной экспертизы психолого-педагогической экспертизы), несоблюдение квалификационных требований к судебному эксперту и, как следствие, введение в процесс судопроизводства ненадлежащего субъекта судебно-экспертной деятельности, выход эксперта за пределы специальных знаний и процессуальных полномочий, неполнота исследования, применение невалидных методов и методик исследования, иные методологические нарушения, связанные с некорректной оценкой результатов психологической диагностики, неверным феноменологическим анализом важных явлений детско-родительских отношений.Учитывая, что в силу подлежащих доказыванию фактов, важных для принятия решения по делу, заключение эксперта приобретает особое значение и может существенно повлиять на формирование внутреннего убеждения суда, экспертные ошибки существенно повышают риск ошибки судебной. Обосновывается острая необходимость скорейшего принятия нормативноправового акта, регламентирующего ответственность эксперта за уровень своей квалификации и регулирующего профессиональные требования к экспертам

Почему психолого-педагогическая экспертиза по спорам, связанным с воспитанием детей, не отвечает потребностям правосудия

Basing on the compilation of expert practice and the analysis of court practice reasons for the extensive increase psychological and pedagogical examinations assigned in civil proceedings in cases concerning child-rearing are addressed. The main associated issues are the lack of the own methodology for psychological and pedagogical examinations in the judicial proceedings; resolving questions by educational and education psychologists, which are out of the scope of their specialized knowledge and competence, including those falling within the purview of the court’s exclusive com­petence; giving unreasonable advice, which violates citizens’ rights; the lack of professional compe­tence necessary to conduct forensic expertise. It is found that opinions on the results of psychological and pedagogical examinations do not meet the requirements of the law, including on account of private educational psychologists’ insufficient professional training. It is shown that the inadequacy of law regarding professional and qualification requirements to experts allows courts to treat the verification of experts’ competence uncritically. As a result, an improper subject of forensic activity is introduced to the civil proceedings, which violates citizens’ rights to justice, undermines people’s trust in the institutions of forensic expertise and judicial authority.  Given the relevance of the issue, the grounds for application of specialized psychological knowledge in the form of forensic expertise in the civil disputes involving child-rearing are presented in the article, the scope of the necessary experts’ competences is outlined as well as the requirements to their specialized professional training, since forensic examinations must be conducted on a strictly scientific basis, objec­tively and comprehensively.  На основании обобщения экспертной практики и анализа судебной практики рас­смотрены причины масштабного возрастания количества психолого-педагогических экспер­тиз, назначаемых в гражданском судопроизводстве по делам, связанным с воспитанием детей. Основные связанные с этим проблемы – отсутствие собственной методологии психолого-педа­гогической экспертизы в сфере судопроизводства; решение педагогами и педагогами-психоло­гами вопросов, выходящих за пределы их специальных знаний и компетенции, включая вопросы, относящиеся к исключительной компетенции суда; предоставление безосновательных рекомен­даций, нарушающих права граждан; отсутствие профессиональных компетенций, необходимых для производства судебной экспертизы. Установлено, что заключения по результатам психологопедагогических экспертиз не отвечают требованиям законодательства, в том числе по причине отсутствия у частнопрактикующих педагогов-психологов необходимой профессиональной под­готовки. Показано, что несовершенство закона в части профессиональных и квалификационных требований к экспертам позволяет суду некритично относиться к проверке компетенции экспер­та. В результате в гражданский процесс вводится ненадлежащий субъект судебно-экспертной де­ятельности, чем нарушаются права граждан, подрывается доверие населения к институту судеб­ной экспертизы и к судебной власти.  С учетом актуальности данной проблематики в статье представлены основания применения специальных психологических знаний в форме судебной экспертизы по гражданским спорам, связанным с воспитанием детей, очерчен круг компетенций, которыми должны обладать эксперты, и требования к их специальной профессиональной подготовке, поскольку судебные экспертизы должны выполняться на строго научной основе, объективно, всесторонне и полно.

Критерии судебно-психологической экспертной оценки юридически релевантных эмоциональных состояний у обвиняемых: методические рекомендации

The paper discusses a multivariate classification of the concept of “heat of passion” as it is used in forensic psychology, as well as emotional reactions and emotional states. It explores the criteria for differential diagnosis of “heat of passion” and emotional states that have a significant effect on the defendant's consciousness and behavior at the time of committing a crime. An algorithm of forensic psychological evaluation of the defendant's emotional states is proposed, together with examples of sample wording of expert conclusions, and their legal meaning.Приведены многомерная классификация судебно-психологического понятия аффекта, эмоциональные реакции и состояния. Раскрыты критерии дифференциальной диагностики аффекта и эмоциональных состояний, оказывающих существенное влияние на сознание и поведение обвиняемых в момент совершения правонарушения. Даны алгоритм производства экспертизы эмоциональных состояний обвиняемого, типичные формулировки экспертных выводов, показано их юридическое значение

Why Psychological and Pedagogical Examinations in Disputes Concerning Child-Rearing Do Not Meet the Needs of Justice

Basing on the compilation of expert practice and the analysis of court practice reasons for the extensive increase psychological and pedagogical examinations assigned in civil proceedings in cases concerning child-rearing are addressed. The main associated issues are the lack of the own methodology for psychological and pedagogical examinations in the judicial proceedings; resolving questions by educational and education psychologists, which are out of the scope of their specialized knowledge and competence, including those falling within the purview of the court’s exclusive com­petence; giving unreasonable advice, which violates citizens’ rights; the lack of professional compe­tence necessary to conduct forensic expertise. It is found that opinions on the results of psychological and pedagogical examinations do not meet the requirements of the law, including on account of private educational psychologists’ insufficient professional training. It is shown that the inadequacy of law regarding professional and qualification requirements to experts allows courts to treat the verification of experts’ competence uncritically. As a result, an improper subject of forensic activity is introduced to the civil proceedings, which violates citizens’ rights to justice, undermines people’s trust in the institutions of forensic expertise and judicial authority.  Given the relevance of the issue, the grounds for application of specialized psychological knowledge in the form of forensic expertise in the civil disputes involving child-rearing are presented in the article, the scope of the necessary experts’ competences is outlined as well as the requirements to their specialized professional training, since forensic examinations must be conducted on a strictly scientific basis, objec­tively and comprehensively

Typical Mistakes in Forensic Examinations on Disputes Related to Child-Rearing

The article analyses errors when appointing and conducting a forensic examination of disputes related to children’s upbringing. When summarizing expert practice in this category of civil cases (based on the study of 97 expert opinions on forensic psychological examination), the most significant errors were identified: incorrect determination of the type of expertise (including the appointment of psychological and pedagogical expertise which does not have a methodological basis as forensic examination), non-compliance with the qualification requirements to a forensic expert and, as a result, the introduction of an improper subject of forensic expert activity into the judicial process, an expert’s going beyond the limits of specialized knowledge and procedural powers, the incompleteness of research, the use of invalid research methods and techniques, and other methodological violations, associated with the incorrect assessment of the results of psychological diagnostics, inaccurate phenomenological analysis of essential phenomena of child-parent relations.Considering that due to the facts to be proved are essential for deciding on a case, the expert’s opinion is of particular importance and can significantly affect the formation of the court’s inner conviction, which means that expert errors significantly increase the risk of judicial errors. The article substantiates the urgent necessity of the early enactment of a legal act regulating experts’ responsibility for the level of their qualifications and setting professional requirements to experts

Information Letter “On the Issue of Legal Wrongfulness in Establishing Witness Credibility through Forensic Evaluation”

This information letter was produced in response to a growing number of inquiries from investigators, and increased instances of forensic psychologists being appointed to evaluate witness credibility based on videos of interrogations. The letter addresses the need to streamline forensic casework related to the analysis of video recordings of specific investigative actions involving different agents of the criminal process. The letter considers possibilities for commissioning these forensic procedures and the rationale for conducting such examinations, in compliance with the scientific principles of professional forensic work